[Ground mahāmudrā] is what is realized and actualized by the nondual mind of the buddhas (which was explained above) and noble individuals. It is the basic state (Tib. gshis kyi babs) of the three realms of samsara and the true nature of all phenomena from the beginning. It is connate wisdom (lhan gcig skyes pa'i ye shes), which pervades the entire ground....

Because nothing transcends this, it is [known as] mudrā (phyag rgya, seal). Since there is nothing to be sought that is higher than this--no superior "dharmakāya"--it is fit to be referred to as "mahā" (chen po, great)....

This ground has been the dharmakāya from the beginning.

The basis in Kagyu mahāmudrā is not equivalent to the all-basis in dzogchen.

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Not to claim any experience, it's just that I think the point here is that there is indeed a "difference" between gZhi and Ālaya/Kunzhi; however that non-Sutra Mahamudra in actual practice is not limited to the Ālaya. Otherwise how could we say that the practice of (Ground/Essence) Mahamudra is equivalent to the practice of Dzogchen Semde? Because as far as I can tell, none of the Four Yogas of Semde are in the context of the Ālaya. And as Jnana pointed out in citing the 9th Karmapa, the Basis of non-Sutra Mahamudra is not the All-Basis (Ālaya) of Dzogchen.

Well that's one (two, along with me ) with no experience of the phenomenon in question. Any more takers?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

LOL add me to your list. I have no idea what any of this can possibly mean.

The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

The basis of Mahamudra (whether sutra or tantra) is the ground Mahamudra, and that is nothing else but buddha-nature. Alaya-vijnana, the storehouse consciousness, is simply our habits. There is no Buddhist practice founded on habits, since it would not lead to liberation. Thus the foundation is always wisdom, ordinary consciousness, or whatever name you prefer.

1Myriad dharmas are only mind. Mind is unobtainable. What is there to seek?2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,the six paramitas and myriad meansare complete within that essence.

Right, it wouldn't make much sense for there to be Direct-Introduction to the Alaya-Vijnana, unless maybe someone wanted to posit that since the Alaya-Vijnana is permeated by both habits and Buddha Nature, that once the Alaya-Vijnana is cleansed of habits, its Buddha Nature aspect will shine forth rather than being latent. Meaning that the Alaya-Vijnana might be somehow pointed out by the teacher, because how is the student going to "cleanse" it without knowing what it is. This was my idea of what a Sutra Direct Introduction might entail; since Sutra is the Path of Renunciation and Purification, rather than that of Transformation and Self-Liberation. However I don't subscribe to my theory about Sutra Direct Introduction; I was only enquiring.

Nevertheless, as Malcolm has pointed out; the Dzogchen view is that the All-Basis or Ālaya (not to be confused with the Ālaya-Vijnana from what I understand) is more or less Āvidya (ignorance); and the purpose of Dzogchen is Vidya (Knowledge) of the Basis, or the Laya, gZhi, Sthana, or Asraya/Ashraya.

And again, as Jnana pointed out by citing the 9th Karmapa, the Basis of Mahamudra is not the All-Basis/Ālaya of Dzogchen.

Why don't you simply look at the actual instructions of Mahamudra and Dzogchen where the nature of mind is being pointed out/at? Terminology can be very different, and without the necessary definitions very confusing.

1Myriad dharmas are only mind. Mind is unobtainable. What is there to seek?2If the Buddha-Nature is seen,there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.3Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.4With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,the six paramitas and myriad meansare complete within that essence.

Hurrah for the Dzogchen Masters, - May they live long, in good health, and with success in all things.

While I myself have no such experiences, I have a friend who has, and so I will share with you, what he has shared with me. My friend apologizes to all of you who have heard this wordy construct a thousand times before, but it is necessary to state this again, to give a framework to what comes next.

All these Dzogchen terms are just place names on an experiential road map, which is beyond words. Without experiences there is no way to attach the Dzogchen terms to anything useful. My friend told me that he never considered that it was important to have a road map with experiential place names when practicing Dzogchen - going beyond names. The key point is that experiences are what are important. Names function in one dimension and the experiences of Dzogchen, in another. It is as if you have a Google map for earth, with all of the overlays and search capabilities, and then you find yourself on Mars. Your Google Earth doesn't apply and Google Mars doesn't exist. You look around and have a sense that one experience on Mars is different than another, but it is not an intellectual understanding. This analogy has it's limits. Here we are not talking about taking your earth way of seeing with you, and then using your earth way of seeing, in another place, that is not earth, to describe that new place. Here my friend is referring to a different way of knowing / perceiving that does not use words. The key point is that you have to let go of all intellectual road maps / terms / reference points, to be able to relax / soak / sink / rise into the state beyond words. Then the experiences beyond words are your reference points, and you learn your way around, in this new dimension / way of perceiving / being. But because the experiences are beyond words, the road map is beyond words. All the words about Dzogchen are not Dzogchen. They are words about Dzogchen. Dzogchen is direct experience beyond words.

So this is why we go to a Dzogchen Master, get the pointing out experience and then DO the many practices of Dzogchen to have the experiences that develop confidence, and then develop the capacity to continue in this "instant presence," 24/7. We establish the view through direct experiences. This is the path of Dzogchen.

So is it useful to describe in words the difference between the store-house consciousness and the base? Maybe, but only if you understand that the only relevance is in the realm of words, and that this is only useful if you use this information to then be able to let go of all words, to rest in your natural state, instant presence. Tricky business using words, to speak about Dzogchen. Like using a thorn to remove a thorn that cannot be seen or even spoken of.

My friend has said, one of the experiences of Dzogchen has the quality of all-pervasive-vast-space. This experience does not name itself as anything, but from the viewpoint of words, can be spoken of as having an awareness presence as / in all pervasive vast space. Since it pervades everything, it can be spoken of, from the viewpoint of words, as containing everything, and therefore, as a kind of store-house consciousness.

My friend has said, the base is different, as it has no descriptors whatsoever, and you cannot even say, from the point of view of the base, that there are "no descriptors whatsoever." You cannot say anything, even if you wanted to. Words simply don't apply to the base. - There is nothing to stick to - like writing on air or water.

My friend is a little shy to speak further about this, because there are so many great scholar / practitioners on Dharma Wheel, who he feels would be better able to answer questions about these matters. Best is if you can take these questions to a real Dzogchen Master. Also, there are so many good books by real Dzogchen Masters. My friend says he is only make believe, so you should not expect too much from him.

That's great, now can you relate that back to Mahamudra since the discussion is Mahamudra and Dzogchen and we are in the Mahamudra section of the forum?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

That's great, now can you relate that back to Mahamudra since the discussion is Mahamudra and Dzogchen and we are in the Mahamudra section of the forum?

Greetings to all and ALL,

Good question.

Executive summary: it is all slices from the same baklava: experience.

Since I know little of Dzogchen and less of Mahamudra It is totally absurd to try to answer your questions, but in the spirit of a rusty hinge giving voice, when the door is moved by the wind, I will do my best.

I think the first question is whether there is a difference between the view / experience of the storehouse consciousness and base consciousness between Dzogchen and Mahamudra.I think the second question is whether a practitioner of Dzogchen is missing something if they don't also practice / study Mahamudra and vv.

First question. Human experience is human experience. Mostly, we are wired the same. You may like Retsena and I like Brunello, Tibetans like barley beer, but each will get you drunk. You may call it "πιωμένος," and I call it "drunk" but the experience is the same. In the old days the practitioners would be up on the mountains, in their caves and huts, practicing. Sometimes they would run out of salt and they would then knock on their neighbors door to borrow some salt. Serious practitioners from all the schools helped each other and they would share the salt, tea and barley and butter. They also talked about practice. They also gave "pointing out instruction" to each other. I am sure there were some friendly, "My pointing out is bigger than yours," competitions. I am sure that going beyond limits, some would do practices from each tradition. Over the many centuries, I think that things became a little blurred. It may be that some of the living Great Masters, who are accomplished Masters in both traditions, ChNNR, Dzogchen Penlop Rinpoche, Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamsto Rinpoche, Lama Wangdor Rinpoche, Cho Kyi Nyima Rinpoche, and his brothers, Lho Ontul Rinpoche, and many others, could give you a guided tour through the pointing out instructions in both traditions.

I should mention that all of the 5 or so Drikung Kargu Lamas whom I have met, also hold both traditions through the precious Yangzab lineage. Note that Ven. Lho Ontul Rinpoche, a renowned Drikung Kargu Lama, is teaching, "Trekcho Dzogchen Pith Practice Instructions: Garab Dorje's Three Words That Strike The Vital Point," and many, many other practices, at DDCV in Vermont from the 14th th 24th of June, 2012.

I am also sure you will find Nyinmapa, Bonpo, Sakya and Gelugpa Lamas who hold both lineages, but who do not speak of this because of politics.

It may be possible that from the guided tour, you will be able to discern subtle experiential differences in the lineal transmissions of the pointing out instructions, but I don't think so. I also do not think that the Masters would do would do this for you. It is not important. What is important is that you get any direct experience yourself. Whether you "get it" from Dzogchen, Mahamudra, or from the gradualist methods of "creative visualization" and "absorption," doesn't matter. Though the views are different from the top of this mountain or that mountain, the view from any mountain is different from the view in the valley. The key point is that you are not in Kansas anymore: meaning, that you now have a new way of seeing, a new perspective on everything, that you did not have before, and a short path to enlightenment.

I've been very fortunate, (must be good karma earned in a past life ), and have received 7, or so, pointing out, instructions, in both traditions. Maybe my perceptions and sensitivity are not as sharp as some, but I could not tell the difference. So for me, this would apply, both to the pointing out of the "store house" consciousness" and the "base" consciousness, though I have never labeled them as such, while receiving the pointing out instructions, and do so only in retrospect. The labeling is not important to me.

Books, books, books.

Here are some book that may shed light on the differences and similarities between Dzogchen and Mahamudra. My 2 cents is, " Do you want to read cook books or eat a nice meal." Each activity serves a different purpose. I guess I am trying to say, "Don't eat cookbooks when you are hungry." Have a nice baklava instead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baklava

"The 'Union of Mahamudra and Dzogchen' means that no separation exists between the two. Both Mahamudra and Dzogchen contain three subsections. In Mahamudra the sections are called Sutra, Tantra, and Essence Mahamudra. In Dzogchen they are called Mind, Space,and Instructions sections. In the ultimate view of these two schools there is no difference." P17 - Introductory Teachings.

"Why is it that the Rangtong approach is taught before the Shentong approach? In the beginning if it were taught that the nature of the mind is luminous, then you could say "Oh, yes the nature of the mind is luminous," while all the time maintaining a clinging to the self and clinging to phenomena as being truly existent. That clinging would be embellished by the understanding of phenomena s luminous. Whereas if you start out with the Rongtong view, you begin with understanding the different kinds of no-self, the no-self of persons and the no-self of phenomena and this cuts through clinging to the self and phenomena as truly existent, which is the basis for the teachings of the luminous nature of the mind. Once you have cut through ego and cut through clinging to things as truly existent, at that point, you are freed to see the luminous nature." P106

"There is a difference between the Rangtong school and the Shentong school in what is posited as the ultimate. Within the Rangtong school, what is posited as the ultimate is the the expanse of space or emptiness. It is also understood as being the dharmata that is free of mental elaborations, or free of complexity. In the Shenong view what is posited as ultimate is either the primordial wisdom, that is free of mental elaborations, or space and awareness inseparable. This is understood in a non-dual way. It is not that there is something to be realized, and something that realizes it. When you speak of space and awareness as being inseparable, you are speaking of the ultimate wisdom and the ultimate awareness. P. 94

Now can I have some Baklava???

That said, I have heard rumors, that the King of Dharma, Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche taught EVERYTHING, of Dzogchen and Mahamudra (including †he dark retreat) to the beyond fortunate inner students of Ven. Trungpa Rinpoche.

To answer the second question, whether a practitioner of Dzogchen is missing something if they don't also practice / study Mahamudra and vv, my answer is no.

When you have had some baklava (practice), from either school, your hunger goes away.

Now can I have some halva?

The key point is that it is human nature to want change and diversion, so some people like to do both Dzogchen and Mahamudra practice.

Maybe if you had to eat only halva, you would not like it, whereas other people like halva for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Some people like one thing and some another. Some people like a variety of things.

Thank you! And, by the way, I prefer the Turkish baclava to the Greek one, it's made with pistachio nuts instead of almonds or walnuts! I guess it's to be expected since my mothers side of the family were refugees from Asia Minor.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

There are those who realized nature by Mahamudra and Dzogchen. The difference? Since nature is not divided: non. Differences/dividing this and that is only existing in grasping by habitual tendencies, not in nature.

What we meet to liberate us, need not to be grasped, or it turns in another neurosis.

Know that perception involved with the duality of perceiver and perceived is consciousness.Know that awareness itself, liberated from perceiver and perceived, is primordial awareness: the dharmadhatu.—Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche

That said, I have heard rumors, that the King of Dharma, Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche taught EVERYTHING, of Dzogchen and Mahamudra (including †he dark retreat) to the beyond fortunate inner students of Ven. Trungpa Rinpoche.

He taught us everything, and he started (in 1991) by making sure we thoroughly understood the four schools of emptiness and Madhyamaka before he progressed to any other topics. In 2005 he concluded by saying he'd taught us all we needed to know, and more. Our good fortune is beyond calculation.

'In short, what dzogchen calls 'endowed with the threefold wisdom,' the wisdom of the primordially pure essence, the wisdom of the spontaneously present nature and the wisdom of the all-pervasive compassion, is described by the followers of mahāmudrā as the nonarising essence, the unobstructed nature, and the variously manifesting expression. It is unanimously agreed that they are 'different aspects of the same identity.'

These are the different names of the 3 kayas in the lineages of Dzogchen and Mahamudra.The 'different aspects of the same identity' is the Svabhavikakaya.

There is only one path in regards to the goal (realization). To say there are separate paths is like saying there are different realizations.There is only one realization, the pointing out!

Yes, one is quicker (just like tantra is quicker than sutra) but if you cannot understand the meaning how can you practice it?That is why the Buddha taught the Hinayana, Mahayana, and Tantrayana.

Unfortunately too many people get fascinated with what they don't understand. Or they like to show and compete with people with how much they know. It's ego driven and not the intent of meditation.

We have to have realization to understand what the masters are saying outside the Hinayana and Mahayana.Some people will use an intellectual understanding against someone else's intellectually understanding. So they will compete with each other when neither one has the realization! They discuss intellectual understanding of high teaching when they don't even have hinayana understanding!

I am guilty too. I wasted a large portion of my life but I've since forced myself to concentrate on meditation because I'm old now and there's limited time. My learning is poor but that's okay because I believe concentrating on meditation is most important.

That said, I have heard rumors, that the King of Dharma, Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso Rinpoche taught EVERYTHING, of Dzogchen and Mahamudra (including †he dark retreat) to the beyond fortunate inner students of Ven. Trungpa Rinpoche.

He taught us everything, and he started (in 1991) by making sure we thoroughly understood the four schools of emptiness and Madhyamaka before he progressed to any other topics. In 2005 he concluded by saying he'd taught us all we needed to know, and more. Our good fortune is beyond calculation.

.... Only if you actually practice it to your full capacity... Otherwise you may have been taught algebra or needlework. Yes all these instructions are amazing, but receiving them alone is only the tip of the iceberg.

This is from my notes at a class Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche taught on Mahamudra in Crestone.

The ground and the all basis are the same but have different conceptualisolates. They are like a mirror and its capacity to reflect. A mirror will reflect both goodand bad things without being changed by anything. So the mind's nature and its functionare referred to by two different names.